Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 20 of 173
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 92-B, Issue SUPP_IV | Pages 499 - 499
1 Oct 2010
Siebelt M Bhandari M Bloem R Pilot P Poolman R Siebelt T
Full Access

Background: One of the disadvantages of the Impact Factor (IF) is self-citation. The SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) indicator excludes self-citations and incorporates quality of citations that a journal receives by other journals, rather than absolute numbers. This study re-evaluated self-citation influence on the 2007 IF for 17 major orthopaedic journals and the difference in ranking using IF or SJR was investigated. Methods: Divided in a general (n = 8) and specialized (n = 9) group, all journals were analysed for self-citation rate, self-cited rate and citation density. Rankings of the 17 journals for IF and SJR were determined and the difference in ranking was calculated. Results: Specialized journals had higher self-citation rates (p = 0.05), self-cited rates (p = 0.003) and lower citation-densities (p = 0.01). Both groups correlated for self-citation rate and impact factor (general: r = 0.85 ; p = 0.008) (specialized: r = 0.71 ; p = 0.049). When ranked for SJR instead of IF, five journals maintained rank, six improved their rank and six experienced a decline in rank. Biggest differences were seen for BMC MD (+7 places) and CORR (− 4 places). Group-analyses for the IF (general: 7.50 – 95%CI 3.19 to 11.81) (specialized: 10.33 – 95%CI 6.61 to 14.06) (p = 0.26), SJR (general: 6.63 – 95%CI 2.66 to 10.60) (specialized: 11.11 – 95%CI 7.62 to 14.60) (p = 0.07) and the difference between both rankings (general: 0.88 – 95%CI –1.75 to 3.50) (specialized: − 0.78 – 95%CI –2.20 to 0.65) (p = 0.20), showed an enhanced underestimation of sub-specialist journals. Conclusion: Citation analysis shows that general journals tend to use more citations per published article and a larger portion of self-citations constitutes citations of sub-specialist journals compared to more general journals. The SJR excludes the influence of self-citation and awarded prestige by the SJR implies a different quality-evaluation for most orthopaedic journals. A disadvantage using this indicator, is an enhanced effect of underestimation of sub-specialist journals


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 91-B, Issue SUPP_I | Pages 107 - 107
1 Mar 2009
Fawzy E Dashti H Oxborrow N Williamson J
Full Access

Aim: To measure the quality of five major scientific meetings by assessing the publication rate of papers presented and recording their citation index. Material and Methods: Abstracts of podium presentations at the meetings of the Scoliosis Research Society, International Society for the Study of the Lumbar Spine, British Scoliosis Society, BritSpine and Eurospine were included. We performed a Medline search to identify publications from the abstract. We calculated the time from meeting to publication and recorded the citation rate of the articles. Results: Of 396 abstracts, 182 were published in peer-review journals – a publication rate of 46%. The publication rates of the five meetings (SRS, BSS, ISSLS, Eurospine, Britspine) were 69%, 53%, 51%, 38%, 24% respectively. Most publications were in “Spine” (55%), then European Spine Journal (11%). The median citation rate of the papers from the SRS, ISSLS, BSS, Eurospine, Britspine meetings was 3, 3, 3, 2, and 1 respectively. The average time to publication was 16 months. Discussion & Conclusions: Podium presentation is a valuable means for the dissemination of research findings. However, a paper in a peer-reviewed journal is subjected to greater scrutiny, and is perhaps a better indicator of the work’s merit. The average rate of publication in medicine following presentation is 45%. 1. Spinal meetings are within this range. Although the quality of the scientific work is not the only factor to determine publication, and nor is the quality of the presentations the only factor to assess in evaluating a meeting, the rate of publication and citation rate provide an indicator of the quality and scientific level of meetings


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 90-B, Issue SUPP_III | Pages 458 - 458
1 Aug 2008
Fawzy E Dashti H Oxborrow N Williamson J
Full Access

Aim: To measure the quality of five major scientific meetings by assessing the publication rate of papers presented and recording their citation index. Material and Methods: Abstracts of podium presentations at the meetings of the Scoliosis Research Society, International Society for the Study of the Lumbar Spine, British Scoliosis Society, BritSpine and Eurospine were included. We performed a Medline search to identify publications from the abstract. We calculated the time from meeting to publication and recorded the citation rate of the articles. Results: Of 396 abstracts, 182 were published in peer-review journals – a publication rate of 46%. The publication rates of the five meetings (SRS, BSS, ISSLS, Eurospine, Britspine) were 69%, 53%, 51%, 38%, 24% respectively. Most publications were in “Spine” (55%), then European Spine Journal (11%). The median citation rate of the papers from the SRS, ISSLS, BSS, Eurospine, Britspine meetings was 3, 3, 3, 2, and 1 respectively. The average time to publication was 16 months. Discussion & Conclusions: Podium presentation is a valuable means for the dissemination of research findings. However, a paper in a peer-reviewed journal is subjected to greater scrutiny, and is perhaps a better indicator of the work’s merit. The average rate of publication in medicine following presentation is 45%. 1. Spinal meetings are within this range. Although the quality of the scientific work is not the only factor to determine publication, and nor is the quality of the presentations the only factor to assess in evaluating a meeting, the rate of publication and citation rate provide an indicator of the quality and scientific level of meetings


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 94-B, Issue 2 | Pages 276 - 280
1 Feb 2012
Buijze GA Weening AA Poolman RW Bhandari M Ring D

Using inaccurate quotations can propagate misleading information, which might affect the management of patients. The aim of this study was to determine the predictors of quotation inaccuracy in the peer-reviewed orthopaedic literature related to the scaphoid. We randomly selected 100 papers from ten orthopaedic journals. All references were retrieved in full text when available or otherwise excluded. Two observers independently rated all quotations from the selected papers by comparing the claims made by the authors with the data and expressed opinions of the reference source. A statistical analysis determined which article-related factors were predictors of quotation inaccuracy. The mean total inaccuracy rate of the 3840 verified quotes was 7.6%. There was no correlation between the rate of inaccuracy and the impact factor of the journal. Multivariable analysis identified the journal and the type of study (clinical, biomechanical, methodological, case report or review) as important predictors of the total quotation inaccuracy rate.

We concluded that inaccurate quotations in the peer-reviewed orthopaedic literature related to the scaphoid were common and slightly more so for certain journals and certain study types. Authors, reviewers and editorial staff play an important role in reducing this inaccuracy.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 103-B, Issue SUPP_4 | Pages 60 - 60
1 Mar 2021
Aldawsari K Alotaibi MT AlSaleh K
Full Access

Spondylolisthesis is common recognized spine pathology. A lot of studies targeted spondylolisthesis in the recent years, few of which have made a major influential impact on the clinical practice. To the extent our knowledge this is the first study to highlight and analyze the top 100 cited articles on spondylolisthesis through a systematic search strategy used previously in published studies in different medical specialty. The aim of this study is to identify the most cited studies on spondylolisthesis and report their impact in spine field. Thomson Reuters Web of Science-Science Citation Index Expanded was searched using title-specific search “spondylolisthesis”. All studies published in English language between 1900 and 2019 were included with no restrictions. The top 100 cited articles were identified using “Times cited” arranging articles from high to low according to citation count. Further analysis was made to obtain the following items: Article title, author's name and specialty, country of origin, institution, journal of publication, year of publication, citations number, study design. The citation count of the top 100 articles ranged from 69 to 584. All published between 1950 – 2016. Among 20 journals, Spine had the highest number of articles 47, with citation number of 5964 out of 13644. Second ranked was Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery with 16 articles and a total citation of 3187. In respect to the primary author's specialty, Orthopedic surgeons contributed to the majority of top 100 list with 82 articles, Neurosurgery was the second specialty with 10 articles. United states had produced more than half of the list by 59 articles. England was the second country with 7 articles. Surgical management of lumbar spondylolisthesis was the most common discussed topic. This article identifies the top 100 influential papers on spondylolisthesis and recognizes an important aspect of knowledge evolution served by leading researchers as they guide today's clinical decision making in spondylolisthesis


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 96-B, Issue 3 | Pages 414 - 419
1 Mar 2014
Kodumuri P Ollivere B Holley J Moran CG

We evaluated the top 13 journals in trauma and orthopaedics by impact factor and looked at the longer-term effect regarding citations of their papers. All 4951 papers published in these journals during 2007 and 2008 were reviewed and categorised by their type, subspecialty and super-specialty. All citations indexed through Google Scholar were reviewed to establish the rate of citation per paper at two, four and five years post-publication. The top five journals published a total of 1986 papers. Only three (0.15%) were on operative orthopaedic surgery and none were on trauma. Most (n = 1084, 54.5%) were about experimental basic science. Surgical papers had a lower rate of citation (2.18) at two years than basic science or clinical medical papers (4.68). However, by four years the rates were similar (26.57 for surgery, 30.35 for basic science/medical), which suggests that there is a considerable time lag before clinical surgical research has an impact. We conclude that high impact journals do not address clinical research in surgery and when they do, there is a delay before such papers are cited. We suggest that a rate of citation at five years post-publication might be a more appropriate indicator of importance for papers in our specialty. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:414–19


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 96-B, Issue SUPP_15 | Pages 20 - 20
1 Oct 2014
Bertram W Nelson I Harding I Nelson I
Full Access

To identify the most cited British author, unit and country within Great Britain among the scoliosis and spinal deformity literature. Using methods as described by Skovrlj (2014), a search of the Thomson Reuters Web of Science was performed using the terms ‘scoliosis’ and ‘spine deformity’ from 1900 to 2013 published from authors in the following countries: UK, England, Scotland, Ireland, Wales. Additional citations searches were performed using PubMed and Google scholar. Results were sorted according to number of citations; papers applicable to scoliosis or spinal deformity were chosen. The Top 25 citations from British authors were established. 80% of papers were published before 2000. Citation counts and therefore rankings varied for each of the three citation searches, producing differences in rank of as great as 28 for the same paper. Ruth Wynne-Davies from Edinburgh ranked number one in all three searches, followed by SG Boyd, R Dickson, and M McMaster. Half of the top ten papers were published by authors from Edinburgh. The most cited author in Great Britain from all citation searches is Ruth Wynne Davies. However, the citation count of all papers varied depending on the search platform used, producing varying ranks for all other papers


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 9 | Pages 1457 - 1461
1 Sep 2021
Esworthy GP Johnson NA Divall P Dias JJ

Aims. The aim of this study was to identify the origin and development of the threshold for surgical intervention, highlight the consequences of residual displacement, and justify the importance of accurate measurement. Methods. A systematic review of three databases was performed to establish the origin and adaptations of the threshold, with papers screened and relevant citations reviewed. This search identified papers investigating functional outcome, including presence of arthritis, following injury. Orthopaedic textbooks were reviewed to ensure no earlier mention of the threshold was present. Results. Knirk and Jupiter (1986) were the first to quantify a threshold, with all their patients developing arthritis with > 2 mm displacement. Some papers have discussed using 1 mm, although 2 mm is most widely reported. Current guidance from the British Society for Surgery of the Hand and a Delphi panel support 2 mm as an appropriate value. Although this paper is still widely cited, the authors published a re-examination of the data showing methodological flaws which is not as widely reported. They claim their conclusions are still relevant today; however, radiological arthritis does not correlate with the clinical presentation. Function following injury has been shown to be equivalent to an uninjured population, with arthritis progressing slowly or not at all. Joint space narrowing has also been shown to often be benign. Conclusion. Knirk and Jupiter originated the threshold value of 2 mm. The lack of correlation between the radiological and clinical presentations warrants further modern investigation. Measurement often varies between observers, calling a threshold concept into question and showing the need for further development in this area. The principle of treatment remains restoration of normal anatomical position. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(9):1457–1461


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 93-B, Issue SUPP_IV | Pages 592 - 592
1 Nov 2011
Hoang-Kim M Bhandari M Beaton DE Schemitsch EH
Full Access

Purpose: Today, numerous functional outcome tools exist to assess the patient’s ability to carry out basic and instrumental activities of daily living. Furthermore, the increase in range of mobility measures reflect differences in rating scales, scores, administration and scoring options which make outcome results difficult to assess across trials. Because of the lack of consensus among investigators, we wanted to identify the citation patterns of the functional outcomes tools used by investigators in hip fracture RCTs. We believed that the lack of proper citation is an underlying factor in the diverse usage of outcome tools. Method: We extracted the citations of disability tools from 59 Level 1 hip fracture RCTs. Disability was defined using the WHO classification (ICF). We excluded measures assessing body structure. The text and reference lists of the identified articles were screened in order to compile relevant literature on the instrument used in the RCT. Disability tools which were cited in the references were also compared to original development articles. Results: Overall 68 different instruments were identified that measured disability in the hip fracture literature. According to ICF, 47 tools measured body function alone, 13 tools evaluated activity limitations and participation restriction and 8 were composite scoring systems. We found that 34.2% of the trials did not provide any citations to the tools assessing body function. In trials measuring activity and participation, 23.2% provided instrument citations. In trials using composite scoring systems, 19.4% of the trials provided instrument citations. All of the instrument citations when provided by the investigators were found to correspond to original development articles or trials. Conclusion: The appropriate choice of a functional outcome instrument is fundamental in order to ensure that the results that are obtained reflect the patient. However, if citations of the indices and scales themselves are lacking, trial methodology and results could be informative but not replicated. In the future, we recommend that rigor in quality reporting include proper instrument citations


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 106-B, Issue SUPP_2 | Pages 83 - 83
2 Jan 2024
Halloum A Kold S Rölfing J Abood A Rahbek O
Full Access

The aim of this scoping review is to understand the extent and type of evidence in relation to the use of guided growth for correcting rotational deformities of long bones. Guided growth is routinely used to correct angular deformities in long bones in children. It has also been proven to be a viable method to correct rotational deformities, but the concept is not yet fully examined. Databases searched include Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Google Scholar. All identified citations were uploaded into Rayyan.ai and screened by at least two reviewers. The search resulted in 3569 hits. 14 studies were included: 1 review, 3 clinical trials and 10 pre-clinical trials. Clinical trials: a total of 21 children (32 femurs and 5 tibiae) were included. Surgical methods were 2 canulated screws connected by cable, PediPlates obliquely oriented, and separated Hinge Plates connected by FiberTape. Rotation was achieved in all but 1 child. Adverse effects reported include limb length discrepancy (LLD), knee stiffness and rebound of rotation after removal of tethers. 2 pre-clinical studies were ex-vivo studies, 1 using 8-plates on Sawbones and 1 using a novel z-shaped plates on human cadaver femurs. There were 5 lapine studies (2 using femoral plates, 2 using tibial plates and 1 using an external device on tibia), 1 ovine (external device on tibia), 1 bovine (screws and cable on metacarp) and a case-report on a dog that had an external device spanning from femur to tibia. Rotation was achieved in all studies. Adverse effects reported include implant extrusions, LLD, articular deformities, joint stiffness and rebound. All included studies conclude that guided growth is a viable treatment for rotational deformities of long bones, but there is great variation in models and surgical methods used, and in reported adverse effects


Distal radius fractures (DRF) are common and the indication for surgical treatment remain controversial in patients higher than 60 years old. The purpose of the study was to review and analyze the current evidence-based literature. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA guidelines in order to evaluate the efficacy of volar locking plating (VLP) and conservative treatment in DRF in patients over 60 years old. Electronic databases including MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase, Web of science and Clinical Trial.gov were searched from inception to October 2020 for randomized controlled trials. Relevant article reference lists were also passed over. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted the data. Main outcomes included functional status: wrist range of motion, validated scores and grip strength. Secondary outcomes include post-operative complications and radiologic assessment. From 3009 screened citations, 5 trials (539 patients) met the inclusion criteria. All trials of this random effect meta-analysis were at moderate risk of bias due to lack of blinding. Differences in the DASH score (MD −5,91; 95% CI, −8,83; −3,00), PRWE score (MD −9.07; 95% CI, −14.57, −3.57) and grip strength (MD 5,12; 95% CI, 0,59-9,65) were statistically significant and favored VLPs. No effect was observed in terms of range of motion. Adverse events are frequent in both treatment groups, reoperation rate is higher in the VLP group. VLP may provide better functional outcomes in patients higher than 60 years old. More RCT are still needed to evaluate if the risks and complications of VLP outweigh the benefits


Distal radius fractures (DRF) are common and the indication for surgical treatment remain controversial in patients higher than 60 years old. The purpose of the study was to review and analyze the current evidence-based literature. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA guidelines in order to evaluate the efficacy of volar locking plating (VLP) and conservative treatment in DRF in patients over 60 years old. Electronic databases including MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase, Web of science and Clinical Trial.gov were searched from inception to October 2020 for randomized controlled trials. Relevant article reference lists were also passed over. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted the data. Main outcomes included functional status: wrist range of motion, validated scores and grip strength. Secondary outcomes include post-operative complications and radiologic assessment. From 3009 screened citations, 5 trials (539 patients) met the inclusion criteria. All trials of this random effect meta-analysis were at moderate risk of bias due to lack of blinding. Differences in the DASH score (MD −5,91; 95% CI, −8,83; −3,00), PRWE score (MD −9.07; 95% CI, −14.57, −3.57) and grip strength (MD 5,12; 95% CI, 0,59-9,65) were statistically significant and favored VLPs. No effect was observed in terms of range of motion. Adverse events are frequent in both treatment groups, reoperation rate is higher in the VLP group. VLP may provide better functional outcomes in patients higher than 60 years old. More RCT are still needed to evaluate if the risks and complications of VLP outweigh the benefits


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 9 | Pages 773 - 784
1 Sep 2021
Rex SS Kottam L McDaid C Brealey S Dias J Hewitt CE Keding A Lamb SE Wright K Rangan A

Aims. This systematic review places a recently completed multicentre randomized controlled trial (RCT), UK FROST, in the context of existing randomized evidence for the management of primary frozen shoulder. UK FROST compared the effectiveness of pre-specified physiotherapy techniques with a steroid injection (PTSI), manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) with a steroid injection, and arthroscopic capsular release (ACR). This review updates a 2012 review focusing on the effectiveness of MUA, ACR, hydrodilatation, and PTSI. Methods. MEDLINE, Embase, PEDro, Science Citation Index, Clinicaltrials.gov, CENTRAL, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry were searched up to December 2018. Reference lists of included studies were screened. No language restrictions applied. Eligible studies were RCTs comparing the effectiveness of MUA, ACR, PTSI, and hydrodilatation against each other, or supportive care or no treatment, for the management of primary frozen shoulder. Results. Nine RCTs were included. The primary outcome of patient-reported shoulder function at long-term follow-up (> 6 months and ≤ 12 months) was reported for five treatment comparisons across four studies. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were: ACR versus MUA: 0.21 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00 to 0.42), ACR versus supportive care: -0.13 (95% CI -1.10 to 0.83), and ACR versus PTSI: 0.33 (95% CI 0.07 to 0.59) and 0.25 (95% CI -0.34 to 0.85), all favouring ACR; MUA versus supportive care: 0 (95% CI -0.44 to 0.44) not favouring either; and MUA versus PTSI: 0.12 (95% CI -0.14 to 0.37) favouring MUA. None of these differences met the threshold of clinical significance agreed for the UK FROST and most confidence intervals included zero. Conclusion. The findings from a recent multicentre RCT provided the strongest evidence that, when compared with each other, neither PTSI, MUA, nor ACR are clinically superior. Evidence from smaller RCTs did not change this conclusion. The effectiveness of hydrodilatation based on four RCTs was inconclusive and there remains an evidence gap. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(9):773–784


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 92-B, Issue 10 | Pages 1338 - 1343
1 Oct 2010
Kelly JC Glynn RW O’Briain DE Felle P McCabe JP

The credibility and creativity of an author may be gauged by the number of scientific papers he or she has published, as well as the frequency of citations of a particular paper reflecting the impact of the data on the area of practice. The object of this study was to identify and analyse the qualities of the top 100 cited papers in orthopaedic surgery. The database of the Science Citation Index of the Institute for Scientific Information (1945 to 2008) was used. A total of 1490 papers were cited more than 100 times, with the top 100 being subjected to further analysis. The majority originated in the United States, followed by the United Kingdom. The top 100 papers were published in seven specific orthopaedic journals. Analysis of the most-cited orthopaedic papers allows us a unique insight into the qualitites, characteristics and clinical innovations required for a paper to attain ‘classic’ status


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 3, Issue 10 | Pages 826 - 831
28 Oct 2022
Jukes C Dirckx M Bellringer S Chaundy W Phadnis J

Aims. The conventionally described mechanism of distal biceps tendon rupture (DBTR) is of a ‘considerable extension force suddenly applied to a resisting, actively flexed forearm’. This has been commonly paraphrased as an ‘eccentric contracture to a flexed elbow’. Both definitions have been frequently used in the literature with little objective analysis or citation. The aim of the present study was to use video footage of real time distal biceps ruptures to revisit and objectively define the mechanism of injury. Methods. An online search identified 61 videos reporting a DBTR. Videos were independently reviewed by three surgeons to assess forearm rotation, elbow flexion, shoulder position, and type of muscle contraction being exerted at the time of rupture. Prospective data on mechanism of injury and arm position was also collected concurrently for 22 consecutive patients diagnosed with an acute DBTR in order to corroborate the video analysis. Results. Four videos were excluded, leaving 57 for final analysis. Mechanisms of injury included deadlift, bicep curls, calisthenics, arm wrestling, heavy lifting, and boxing. In all, 98% of ruptures occurred with the arm in supination and 89% occurred at 0° to 10° of elbow flexion. Regarding muscle activity, 88% occurred during isometric contraction, 7% during eccentric contraction, and 5% during concentric contraction. Interobserver correlation scores were calculated as 0.66 to 0.89 using the free-marginal Fleiss Kappa tool. The prospectively collected patient data was consistent with the video analysis, with 82% of injuries occurring in supination and 95% in relative elbow extension. Conclusion. Contrary to the classically described injury mechanism, in this study the usual arm position during DBTR was forearm supination and elbow extension, and the muscle contraction was typically isometric. This was demonstrated for both video analysis and ‘real’ patients across a range of activities leading to rupture. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(10):826–831


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 104-B, Issue SUPP_9 | Pages 4 - 4
1 Oct 2022
Nagington A Foster N Snell K Konstantinou K Stynes S
Full Access

Background. Clinical guidelines recommend epidural steroid injection (ESI) as a treatment option for severe disc-related sciatica, but there is considerable uncertainty about its effectiveness. Currently, we know very little about factors that might be associated with good or poor outcomes from ESI. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize and appraise the evidence investigating prognostic factors associated with outcomes following ESI for patients with imaging confirmed disc-related sciatica. Methods. The search strategy involved the electronic databases Medline, Embase, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO and reference lists of eligible studies. Selected papers were quality appraised independently by two reviewers using the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. Between study heterogeneity precluded statistical pooling of results. Results. 2726 citations were identified; 11 studies were eligible. Overall study quality was low with all judged to have moderate or high risk of bias. Forty-five prognostic factors were identified but were measured inconsistently. The most commonly assessed prognostic factors were related to pain and function (n=7 studies), imaging features (n=6 studies), health and lifestyle (n=5 studies), patient demographics (n=4 studies) and clinical assessment findings (n=4 studies). No prognostic factor was found to be consistently associated with outcomes following ESI. Most studies found no association or results that conflicted with other studies. Conclusions. There is little, and low quality, evidence to guide practice in terms of factors that predict outcomes in patients following ESI for disc-related sciatica. The results can help inform some of the decisions about potential prognostic factors that should be assessed in future well-designed prospective cohort studies. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: This study is supported by Health Education England and the National Institute for Health Research (HEE/ NIHR ICA Programme Clinical Lectureship, Dr Siobhan Stynes, NIHR300441). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health and Social Care


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 105-B, Issue SUPP_16 | Pages 13 - 13
17 Nov 2023
Armstrong R McKeever T McLelland C Hamilton D
Full Access

Abstract. Objective. There is no specific framework for the clinical management of sports related brachial plexus injuries. Necessarily, rehabilitation is based on injury presentation and clinical diagnostics but it is unclear what the underlying evidence base to inform rehabilitative management. Methods. A systematic review of the literature was undertaken in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We applied the PEO criteria to inform our search strategy to find articles that reported the rehabilitative management of brachial plexus injuries sustained while playing contact sports. An electronic search of Medline, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science from inception to 3rd November 2022 was conducted. MESH terms and Boolean operators were employed. We applied an English language restriction but no other filters. Manual searches of Google Scholar and citation searching of included manuscripts were also completed. All study types were considered for inclusion provided they were published as peer-reviewed primary research articles and contained relevant information. Two investigators independently carried out the searches, screened by title, abstract and full text. Two researchers independently extracted the data from included articles. Data was cross-checked by a third researcher to ensure consistency. To assess internal validity and risk of bias, the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tools were utilised. Results. The search generated 88 articles. Following removal of duplicates, 43 papers were evaluated against the eligibility criteria. Nine were eligible for full text review, with the majority of exclusions being expert opinion articles. Eight case reports were included. One article reported three individuals, resulting in data for ten athletes. The mean age was 19.8 years (±4.09). Injuries occurred in five American football players, two wrestlers, two rugby players, and a basketball player. No two studies applied the same diagnostic terminology and the severity of injury varied widely. Burning pain and altered sensation was the most commonly reported symptom, alongside motor weakness in the upper limb. Clinical presentation and management differed by injury pattern. Traction injuries caused biceps motor weakness and atrophy of the deltoid region, whereas compression injuries led to rotator cuff weakness. In all cases treatment was separated into acute and rehabilitative management phases, however the time frames related to these differed. Acute interventions varied but essentially entailed soft tissue inflammation management. Rehabilitation approaches variously included strengthening of shoulder complex and cervical musculature. Return-to-play criteria was opaque. The methodological quality of the case reports was acceptable. Four met all nine of the JBI evaluation criteria, and a further three met at least 75% of items. Conclusion(s). There is a distinct lack of evidence supporting rehabilitation management of sports related brachial plexus injury. Through systematic review we found only eight reports, representing ten individual case studies. No trials, cohort studies, or even retrospective registry-based studies are available to inform clinical management, which, necessarily, is driven by expert opinion and application of basic rehabilitation principles. Declaration of Interest. (b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 95-B, Issue SUPP_28 | Pages 75 - 75
1 Aug 2013
Marquez-Lara A Curtis D Patel R Stulberg S
Full Access

Femoral components used in total hip arthroplasty (THA) rely on good initial fixation determined by implant design, femoral morphology, and surgical technique. A higher rate of varus alignment may be of specific concern with short stem implants. Varus placement in uncemented femoral components has been proven not to be detrimental to clinical function; though long-term bone remodeling secondary to varus placement remains unknown. The goal of this study was to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes in patients who underwent THA with one of two uncemented short stem metaphyseal engaging implants at minimum two-year follow-up. A review of 105 patients (average age 65 years; BMI 29 kg/m. 2. ) who underwent a total of 109 primary THAs using the ABG II short stem femoral implant (Stryker, Mahwah, NJ), and 160 hips in 149 patients (average age 70 years; BMI 28 kg/m. 2. ) who underwent primary THA using the Citation stem (Stryker, Mahwah, NJ). The same surgeon (SDS) performed all surgeries through a less invasive posterolateral approach. Pre-operative and post-operative Harris Hips Scores (HHS) and WOMAC scores were collected. Digital radiograph analysis was performed including measuring the stem alignment relative to the femoral shaft. A stem placed with greater than 5 degrees of varus was considered to be in varus. There was no significant difference in demographics (age, gender or BMI) or pre-operative HHS and WOMAC scores between the two groups. Follow-up HHS was 90 (range 63–100) and 94 (range 70–100) for the ABG II and Citation groups, respectively. Follow-up WOMAC scores were 10 (range 0–24) and 6 (range 0–43) for the ABG II and Citation groups, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in any of the scores between the two groups (p>0.05). When looking at AP radiographs for postoperative intramedullary alignment, none of the ABG II implants were placed in varus (>5°), while a small number (4.9%) of Citation implants were implanted in varus alignment. No significant difference was observed in the alignment between the two groups (p>0.05). Average post-op alignment with the ABG was 1.10° (range −4.7–4.9°) and 0.88° (range −4.5–8.9°) with the Citation. The clinical results associated with the use of these stems in patients of all ages and bone types have been identical to those achieved by uncemented stems of standard length. Both implants in this study had excellent clinical and functional results in primary THA after a minimum 24-month follow up. In addition, postoperative radiographic analysis demonstrated that these stems can be reliably and reproducibly placed in neutral alignment despite their short length. The lateral flare on the Citation implant led to a greater number of implants in varus alignment, potentially affecting offset and leg-length, yet the relative increased incidence compared to the ABG II was not significant. Further research is needed in designing implants that optimize proximal femoral contact while maintaining alignment and overall hip kinematics


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XVII | Pages 4 - 4
1 May 2012
Kelly J Glynn R O'Briain D Mc Cabe J
Full Access

Background. Author credibility and creativity is often gauged by the number of scientific papers published, with the frequency of citations for particular articles reflecting the impact of published data on the area of practice. Aims. The objective of this study was to identify and analyse the qualities of the top one hundred cited articles in Orthopaedic surgery. Methods. We used the database of the Science Citation Index of the Institute for Scientific Information (1945-1995) in addition to Scopus, Medline and Pubmed search engines. Results. 1490 articles were cited in excess of 100 times with the top 100 being subjected for further analysis. The 100 articles discussed were published between 1945 and 2005. The mean number of citations per articles was 446.5 (range 334 - 1786). The majority of published articles originated in the United States (68) with the United Kingdom and Canada closely behind (12 and 5 respectively). The 100 articles were published in 7 Orthopaedic journals led by the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American edition (JBJS Am) (n=55) followed by Spine (n=16), Clinical Orthopaedic Related Research (n=14), JBJS Britain (n=7), Journal of Orthopaedic Research (n=5), Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavia (n=2) and Foot and Ankle International (n=1). 80 of the most cited articles reported clinical experiences, 7 were clinical review articles and 13 dealt with basic science. 34 persons authored greater than one top citing article. Conclusion. Analysis of the most cited Orthopaedic papers allows us a unique insight into the qualities, characteristics and clinical innovations, required for a paper to attain the ‘classic’ status. Based on these findings to be well cited such a contribution should be published in the English Language in a high impact journal and originate in North America or the United Kingdom


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 99-B, Issue SUPP_2 | Pages 95 - 95
1 Jan 2017
Moore A Kunutsor S Beswick A Peters T Gooberman-Hill R Whitehouse M Blom A
Full Access

Joint arthroplasty is a common surgical procedure, with over 185,000 primary hip and knee arthroplasties performed in England, Wales and Northern Ireland in 2014. After total hip or knee arthroplasty, about 1% of patients develop deep prosthetic joint infection (PJI), which usually requires further major operations to clear the infection. Although PJI affects only a small percentage of patients it is one of the most devastating complications associated with this procedure. Research evidence has focussed on clinical effectiveness of revision surgery while there has been less focus on the impact on patients and support needs. Using a systematic review approach, the aim of this study was to assess support needs and evaluate what interventions are routinely offered to support patients undergoing treatment for PJI following hip or knee arthroplasty. We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cinahl, Social Science Citation Index, and The Cochrane Library from 1980 to February 15, 2015 for observational (prospective cohort, nested case-control, case-control, and retrospective cohort) studies, qualitative studies, and clinical trials that report on the support needs and interventions for patients being treated for PJI or other major adverse occurrences following joint arthroplasty. Data were extracted by two independent investigators and consensus reached with involvement of a third. Of 4,161 potentially relevant citations, we identified one case-control, one prospective cohort and two qualitative studies for inclusion in the synthesis. Patients report that PJI and treatment had a profoundly negative impact affecting physical, emotional, social and economic aspects of their lives. No study evaluated support interventions for PJI or other major adverse occurrences following hip and knee arthroplasty. The interpretation of study results is limited by variation in study design, outcome measures and the small number of relevant eligible studies. Findings show that patients undergoing treatment for PJI have extensive physical, psychological, social and economic support needs. Our review highlights a lack of evidence about support strategies for patients undergoing treatment for PJI and other adverse occurrences. There is a need to design, implement and evaluate interventions to support these patients